- by Maestro Angel Nuñez - Occasionally some laws become outdated and do not function well for the purpose for which they were written and legislated. Then what is done about it? Simple. Amend the law so it can better serve its purpose. A point in case is the archaic custom of poaching for manatees and sea turtles for their meat during the time when there was a scarcity of meat. However today there is no scarcity of meat, so the law was rewritten to prohibit the killing of these animals. Good deal.
Now many people are clamoring for reform in other laws especially in the area of crime which has become a cancer in our society. A few ask that the law which states that an alleged criminal is innocent until the prosecution proves him guilty be charged to the opposite end. Let him be arrested and charged and treated as guilty and let him prove his innocence. Some people are of the belief that this would increase the rate of conviction and remove a lot of criminals from the streets. Bear in mind that today the statistics show that the smart lawyers are way above the law and are saving 95% of rapists, burglars, and many other culprits of crimes. So what do you think?
Another law that could be revisited is the one that should offer protection to witnesses of crimes and give statements to the police or prosecution. The law as it is now obligates the police to give full disclosure to the defense attorney. That means that the defense attorney knows full well who the witnesses are, what they have seen and said and how they will respond in court. This automatically discourages any person from giving statements and to serve as witnesses in a court of law because their safety is at stake: their lives in danger.
Indeed the police wants us, the citizenry, to report any crimes which we might witness, but who wants to endanger his life? Some witnesses are murdered even before the court case while others are molested and threatened after the alleged criminal is declared "not guilty" courtesy of his smart lawyer. So what? Do not disclose the names of witnesses. A good sworn statement should be enough to convict criminals and protect witnesses.
Here is a thought. It is evident that any lawyer, even a junior lawyer, can easily beat any police officer that acts as prosecutor in court. My point is this. Why can't the government hire a good lawyer, pay him well and put him to work on case files and let him act as prosecutor in the court? That way we should be able to convict and lock and remove many criminals thus preventing him from doing further harm to society. This attorney must be well paid, but any amount of money is justified if it means saving one single life.
So what are your points of views that would help in minimizing crimes?